Anomalous Binocular Depth Perception Due to Unequal Image Brightness

Miles, Paul W.

doi:10.1001/archopht.1953.00920030483008

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, at some interocular contrast ratios, ocular dominance also determines whether an observer perceives the stimulus moving ambiguously or moving only laterally. These findings are similar in concept to those of Miles (1953), who reported that ocular dominance affected the brightness of two stimuli of equal luminance and that this brightness difference influenced the perceived relative depth of the two stimuli.…”

supporting

confidence: 90%

The Effect of Interocular Contrast and Ocular Dominance on the Perception of Motion-in-Depth in 3-D Displays

Piantanida¹,

Hammon²

1981

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 90%

The Effect of Interocular Contrast and Ocular Dominance on the Perception of Motion-in-Depth in 3-D Displays

Piantanida¹,

Hammon²

1981

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some papers have appeared over the intervening years that mention the Venetian blind effect, though few have considered stereopsis per se. Miles (1953 , 1954 ), citing just Cibis and Haber (1951) , explored applied topics briefly, such as the impact of the Venetian blind effect on pilots, and presented what he claimed to be a new phenomenon that he called anisodominance, which was defined as the effect of ocular dominance on perceived distance to each of a pair of stimuli presented on opposite sides of fixation. Neither of Miles’s two papers explored the Venetian blind effect empirically.…”

Section: Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The few papers that did mention Münster (1941) or Cibis and Haber (1951) before 2010 , other than von Békésy (1970) , assume irradiation as a complete account ( Fiorentini and Maffei, 1971 ; Howard & Rogers, 1995 , pp. 310–311; Kumar, 1995 ; Miles, 1953 , 1954 ; Ogle, 1962 , pp. 302–303; and Walker, 1976 ; see also Howard & Rogers, 2012 , p. 286).…”

Section: Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Discovery of the Venetian Blind Effect: A Translation of Münster (1941)

Larkin

Stine

2017

i-Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Münster, the first to discover the effects of a luminance disparity on perceived depth, described two: (1) The apparent displacement in depth of one of a pair of objects relative to the other when viewed with a luminance disparity, and (2) The apparent overall displacement of objects viewed with a luminance disparity away from the observer. The first, which is the Venetian blind effect, was ascribed to irradiation. Current evidence suggests that irradiation fails to account for the effect, implying that neural mechanisms are involved. The second was thought to be related to the perceived distance of a monocularly viewed stimulus embedded in a dichoptically viewed stimulus. However, the measured effect was probably due to aniseikonia. Münster offered a compelling and seemingly complete account of the Venetian blind effect using irradiation theory. Münster's irradiation theory effectively inhibited further research by relegating the perceived depth displacement to largely non-neural mechanisms. It is now becoming clear that Münster's measurement of the Venetian blind effect represents the discovery of one of several mechanisms supporting stereopsis, though he and many others failed to recognize that discovery at the time.

show abstract

“…Procedure.-First, a determination was made of the extent to which empirical data agreed with the geometric relationship between the angle of sagittal inclina¬ tion, i, of the stereoscopic image of the targets and the total angular declination, 8, between the target lines, namely tan i = b tan 8/2a. Again, b and 2a are the observation distance and the interpupillary distance, re¬ spectively.…”

Section: Illmentioning

confidence: 99%